ライフサイエンスコーパス: ethambutol

1 butol, followed by 6 months of isoniazid and ethambutol).

2 for rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol).

3 olid (each with isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol).

4 azid, 25 mg/kg pyrazinamide, and 15-20 mg/kg ethambutol).

5 and the activity was partially inhibited by ethambutol.

6 nd INH, and 1 was resistant to STR, INH, and ethambutol.

7 ve to isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol.

8 seful in limiting the side effects seen with ethambutol.

9 r both rifampin and streptomycin and 90% for ethambutol.

10 cosyl donor and acceptor substrates and with ethambutol.

11 e, and are targets of anti-tuberculosis drug ethambutol.

12 ed as targets for the anti-tuberculosis drug ethambutol.

13 100 person-months with a fluoroquinolone and ethambutol.

14 fampicin (RIF), pyrazinamide, isoniazid, and ethambutol.

15 ed antibiotic regimen was clarithromycin and ethambutol.

16 larithromycin or azithromycin, rifampin, and ethambutol.

17 ve phase), with isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol.

18 longer cost-effective given the high cost of ethambutol.

19 ve phase), with isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol.

20 recursor of levetiracetam, brivaracetam, and ethambutol.

21 .12 mug/ml), rifampin (0.03 to 0.25 mug/ml), ethambutol (0.25 to 2 mug/ml), levofloxacin (0.12 to 1 m

22 cin, amikacin, and kanamycin [15/15 (100%)], ethambutol [12/15 (80%)] and moxifloxacin [14/15 (93.3%)

23 en A consisted of TIW azithromycin and daily ethambutol (15 mg/kg/day), daily rifabutin (300 mg/day),

24 bp); rpsL (streptomycin; 196 bp), and embB (ethambutol; 185 bp).

25 35 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 15-20 mg/kg ethambutol, 20 mg/kg rifampicin per day with 400 mg moxi

26 1.25 microg/ml; D-cycloserine, 25 microg/ml; ethambutol, 20 microg/ml; and rifabutin, 0.5 microg/ml.

27 Regimen B consisted of TIW azithromycin, TIW ethambutol (25 mg/kg/dose), TIW rifabutin (600 mg/dose),

28 In one study, after 7 days of daily ethambutol, 300 mg isoniazid per day was administered to

29 C(max)) below target range were frequent for ethambutol (48% of patients); clarithromycin (56%); and

30 picin 35 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol; 59 to rifampicin 10 mg/kg, isoniazid, pyrazi

31 p blockage reduced the mutation frequency to ethambutol 64-fold.

32 ffectiveness of six months of isoniazid plus ethambutol (6EH), thirty-six months of isoniazid (36H) a

33 to clarithromycin (100%), rifabutin (100%), ethambutol (92%), and sulfamethoxazole or trimethoprim-s

34 thionamide (91.4%), moxifloxacin (91.6%) and ethambutol (93.3%).

35 imens containing rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol +/- a FQ for a median of 9.7 months.

36 scovered that treatment of mycobacteria with ethambutol, a front-line tuberculosis (TB) drug, signifi

37 utol were more active than pyrazinamide plus ethambutol, a regimen recommended for latent TB infectio

38 Isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol achieved higher concentrations in ELF and alv

39 Isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol achieved higher concentrations in epithelial

40 ntacts prescribed ethionamide as compared to ethambutol adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index (

41 combinations with ethambutol (as compared to ethambutol alone) or as D-cycloserine or biotin covalent

42 ion and preserved lung structure better than ethambutol alone.

43 25%), and 93/251 (37%) for fluoroquinolones, ethambutol, amikacin, and linezolid, respectively (amika

44 sults for isoniazid, rifampin, streptomycin, ethambutol, amikacin, kanamycin, capreomycin, ofloxacin,

45 in and isoniazid and predicted resistance to ethambutol, aminoglycosides, pyrazinamide, and quinolone

46 nicotinylhydrazine (INH)], pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, among other drug therapies.

47 iniA gene is also induced by the antibiotic ethambutol, an agent that inhibits cell wall biosynthesi

48 SP II system, agreement increased to 93% for ethambutol and 100% for streptomycin.

49 had full DST, of which 246 were resistant to ethambutol and 217 were resistant to pyrazinamide.

50 5.58 +/- 0.10 days (range, 3 to 9 days) for ethambutol and 5.47 +/- 0.11 days (range, 3 to 9 days) f

51 line drugs (94.91% for isoniazid, 96.60% for ethambutol and 90.63% for pyrazinamide), and maintained

52 nce rarely occurs in patients also receiving ethambutol and a rifamycin.

53 The patient was treated with ethambutol and ciprofloxacin with a good response; howev

54 ve effect of this peptide with isoniazid and ethambutol and confirmed these results with ethambutol i

55 By day 7, resistance to both ethambutol and isoniazid had increased.

56 dose-scheduling studies were performed with ethambutol and log-phase growth Mycobacterium tuberculos

57 in Ag85 antigen production when treated with ethambutol and no change in antigen production when trea

58 Continuation regimens consisted mainly of ethambutol and ofloxacin; mean length of therapy 9 month

59 tuberculosis therapy (rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol and pyrazinamide) was initiated upon Mycobact

60 The toxicity of ethambutol and related agents was evaluated in rodent re

61 By testing isolates yielding discrepant ethambutol and streptomycin results with a lower concent

62 eded to evaluate critical concentrations for ethambutol and streptomycin that accurately detect susce

63 ceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis to ethambutol and streptomycin was evaluated by comparing M

64 ce of the susceptibility testing results for ethambutol and streptomycin was poor.

65 Performance, however, may be suboptimal for ethambutol and streptomycin.

66 Treatment of wild-type C. glutamicum with ethambutol and subsequent cell wall analyses resulted in

67 and 93.8% for isoniazid, 91.6% and 94.4% for ethambutol, and 100% and 100% for fluoroquinolones, resp

68 trations of isoniazid, 100% for rifampin and ethambutol, and 95% for streptomycin.

69 of rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, and explore relationships with clinical trea

70 ked to resistance for isoniazid, rifampicin, ethambutol, and fluoroquinolones.

71 ve therapy as per local guidance: ofloxacin, ethambutol, and high-dose isoniazid for 6 months.

72 B), which includes rifampicin, pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and levofloxacin.

73 omplex (MTBC) and fluoroquinolone, amikacin, ethambutol, and linezolid susceptibility (the latter 2 h

74 icillin, amoxicillin, rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide and also screen for substit

75 mpirical treatment with rifampin, isoniazid, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide daily for 2 months, followe

76 e antitubercular drugs, including isoniazid, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide have also recently been def

77 dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight), ethambutol, and pyrazinamide plus either additional rifa

78 d-line regimen: daily (5 d/wk) moxifloxacin, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide, supplemented with amikacin

79 eived a 4-mo regimen of isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide.

80 ituberculous regimen of isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, and PZA.

81 ill kinetics of doxycycline, clarithromycin, ethambutol, and rifabutin against M chimaera.

82 ndard triple-drug regimen of clarithromycin, ethambutol, and rifampicin or with sequential monotherap

83 o methods was 95, 92, and 83% for isoniazid, ethambutol, and rifampin, respectively.

84 imes-weekly (TIW) regimen of clarithromycin, ethambutol, and rifampin.

85 A guideline-based regimen (a macrolide, ethambutol, and rifamycin, with or without amikacin) was

86 association of DST results for pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and second-line drugs with treatment outcome

87 sceptibility testing (DST) for pyrazinamide, ethambutol, and second-line tuberculosis drugs.

88 uberculosis isolates to isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, and streptomycin was evaluated by comparing

89 Ethambutol appears to block specifically the biosynthesi

90 ask) gene when utilized in combinations with ethambutol (as compared to ethambutol alone) or as D-cyc

91 ifampicin and kanamycin versus isoniazid and ethambutol, as do the relative dynamics of discrete morp

92 The use of ethambutol at the current World Health Organization-reco

93 ve either the oral concomitant levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifampin (CLEAR) regimen o

94 en combining four antibiotics (levofloxacin, ethambutol, azithromycin, and rifamycin) has shown some

95 rug-resistant mutations are located near the ethambutol binding site.

96 in C(max) (95% CI -62 to -5) and a 36% lower ethambutol C(max) (-52 to -14), while viral pathogens we

97 Ethambutol causes a decrease in cytosolic calcium, an in

98 tients and treated with the same antibiotic (ethambutol, clofazimine, or rifampin) that had been admi

99 Sensitivity gains are highest for ethambutol, clofazimine, streptomycin, and ethionamide a

100 iveness was greatest using a fluoroquinolone/ethambutol combination regimen.

101 Ethambutol concentrations were highest in alveolar cells

102 Ethambutol concentrations were highest in alveolar cells

103 ng of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (control) using a noninferiority margin of 6.

104 ials that target cell wall synthesis such as ethambutol, D-cycloserine, and vancomycin.

105 at least one streptomycin-isoniazid-rifampin-ethambutol drug or PZA.

106 A standard 6-month regimen that included ethambutol during the 2-month intensive phase was compar

107 loxacin (400 mg per day) was substituted for ethambutol during the intensive phase and was continued,

108 mpicin (R), isoniazid (H), pyrazinamide (Z), ethambutol (E), moxifloxacin (M), and a new drug, SQ109

109 iazid [H], rifampicin [R], pyrazinamide [Z], ethambutol [E]) or the control regimen (RHZE thrice week

110 h as resistance to rifampin (RMP) (6.3%) and ethambutol (EMB) (6.0%).

111 , 90.0% for isoniazid (INH) (36/40), 70% for ethambutol (EMB) (7/10), and 89.1% (57/64) combined.

112 ycin (STR), isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), ethambutol (EMB) (collectively known as SIRE), and pyraz

113 azid (INH), rifampin, streptomycin (SM), and ethambutol (EMB) for 34 Peruvian Mycobacterium tuberculo

114 Ethambutol (EMB) is an important component of multidrug

115 Reproducibility of ethambutol (EMB) susceptibility test results for Mycobac

116 in arabinan biosynthesis entailed the use of ethambutol (EMB), a first-line antituberculosis agent th

117 line drugs, isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), ethambutol (EMB), and pyrazinamide (PZA), were determine

118 ited States-isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RMP), ethambutol (EMB), and pyrazinamide (PZA).

119 of resistance to the anti-tuberculosis drug ethambutol (EMB), are the only known implicated enzymes.

120 Mefloquine (MFQ), moxifloxacin (MXF), and ethambutol (EMB), in combination, were evaluated against

121 four first-line drugs [i.e. isoniazid (INH), ethambutol (EMB), rifampicin (RIF), pyrazinamide (PZA)],

122 The anti-tuberculosis drug, ethambutol (Emb), was previously shown to inhibit the sy

123 s are a target of the antimycobacterial drug ethambutol (EMB).

124 e antituberculosis drugs isoniazid (INH) and ethambutol (EMB).

125 NH), rifampin (RIF), pyrazinamide (PZA), and ethambutol (EMB).

126 The antimycobacterial compound ethambutol [Emb; dextro-2,2'-(ethylenediimino)-di-1-buta

127 etic sensor for discrimination of isomers of ethambutol (ETB) employing square wave voltammetry (SWV)

128 Ethambutol exerted only a bacteristatic effect; amoxicil

129 The assay also provides information on ethambutol, fluoroquinolone, and diarylquinoline resista

130 >=1 other drug targeting MAC-PD (rifamycin, ethambutol, fluoroquinolone, or amikacin) prescribed con

131 For rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, fluoroquinolones, and streptomycin, the muta

132 daily rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol followed by 4 mo of rifampin and isoniazid, w

133 of isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, followed by 6 months of isoniazid and ethamb

134 eived isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for 8 weeks, followed by 18 weeks of isoniazi

135 py (rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol for the first 2 months followed by isoniazid

136 isoniazid for 24 weeks with pyrazinamide and ethambutol for the first 8 weeks) or a strategy involvin

137 However, exposure to isoniazid or ethambutol, front-line antituberculosis drugs which also

138 sign to receive moxifloxacin (400 mg) versus ethambutol given 5 d/wk versus 3 d/wk (after 2 wk of dai

139 o of rifabutin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (given daily, thrice-weekly, or twice-weekly

140 atients in the isoniazid group (85%) and the ethambutol group (80%) than in the control group (92%),

141 or 17 weeks, followed by 9 weeks of placebo (ethambutol group).

142 9%) in the isoniazid group, 111 (17%) in the ethambutol group, and 123 (19%) in the control group.

143 ge points (97.5% CI, 6.7 to 16.1) versus the ethambutol group.

144 lid and liquid mediums for the isoniazid and ethambutol groups, as compared with the control group, r

145 0], 0.25 and 4.25 microg/ml, respectively) = ethambutol > clarithromycin (MIC90, 1 microg/ml) > minoc

146 ugs, including in pncA (pyrazinamide), embB (ethambutol), gyrA (fluoroquinolones), rrs (aminoglycosid

147 In dose-effect studies, ethambutol had a maximal early bactericidal activity of

148 The combination of levofloxacin-PZA-ethambutol had intermediate bactericidal activity agains

149 ifapentine for rifampin and moxifloxacin for ethambutol had noninferior efficacy and was safe for the

150 While ethambutol had the greatest bacteriologic efficacy in hu

151 Previous exposure to ethambutol halted isoniazid early bactericidal activity.

152 uberculosis, isoniazid, rifampicin, PZA, and ethambutol (HRZE regimen).

153 of isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol (HRZE) was evaluated as a comparator.

154 ral isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol; HRZE), or pretomanid (oral 200 mg daily) and

155 pyrazinamide, 3.0%; streptomycin, 6.2%; and ethambutol hydrochloride, 2.2%.

156 an isolate resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol hydrochloride, and streptomycin (and rifabuti

157 ethambutol and confirmed these results with ethambutol in a murine TB-model.

158 the 4.0-7.9-kg and >=25-kg weight bands, and ethambutol in all 5 weight bands.

159 zinamide in 28 (74%) of 38 participants, and ethambutol in six (15%) of 39 participants.

160 or 6 months reinforced with pyrazinamide and ethambutol in the first 2 months, given thrice-weekly th

161 Inclusion of pyrazinamide and ethambutol in the regimen (when susceptibility was confi

162 rapy (isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol) in Brazil.

163 ithromycin plus clofazimine, with or without ethambutol, in a prospective, multicenter, randomized op

164 for rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, in plasma, epithelial lining fluid, and alve

165 osynthesis inhibitors, such as isoniazid and ethambutol, in tuberculosis regimens.

166 r substrates bind in the active site and how ethambutol inhibits arabinosyltransferases by binding to

167 f M. tuberculosis, and the tuberculosis drug ethambutol inhibits other steps in arabinan biosynthesis

168 ekly therapy with a macrolide, rifampin, and ethambutol is a reasonable initial treatment regimen for

169 Ethambutol is an essential medication in the management

170 Ethambutol is specifically toxic to retinal ganglion cel

171 -regulated upon treatment with isoniazid and ethambutol is the iniBAC operon.

172 The anti-tuberculosis drug ethambutol is thought to target a set of arabinofuranosy

173 Ethambutol is used for the treatment of tuberculosis in

174 cs (isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol) is efficient to treat most patients, the rap

175 eg, isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol) is non-inferior to a 6-month regimen.

176 f 17 clinical isolates of M. tuberculosis to ethambutol, isoniazid, and rifampin were tested by the a

177 several classes of polar analytes including ethambutol, isoniazid, ephedrine, and gemcitabine in bio

178 a control regimen that included 2 months of ethambutol, isoniazid, rifampicin, and pyrazinamide admi

179 og2 dilutions, were 90, 93, 100, and 94% for ethambutol, isoniazid, rifampin, and streptomycin, respe

180 xposure, or drug resistance to pyrazinamide, ethambutol, kanamycin, moxifloxacin, ethionamide, or clo

181 g for 12 antibiotics (rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, amikacin, kanamy

182 s: rifampicin (<=0.125), isoniazid (<=0.25), ethambutol (<=2.0), moxifloxacin (<=0.5), levofloxacin (

183 The visual loss associated with ethambutol may be mediated through an excitotoxic pathwa

184 high level of MAC infection, the addition of ethambutol may only delay resistance.

185 of isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol measured by liquid chromatography with a tand

186 toxicity, and glutamate antagonists prevent ethambutol-mediated cell loss.

187 embC accumulated to produce a wide range of ethambutol minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) that

188 examined the emergence of drug resistance to ethambutol monotherapy in pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynami

189 m complex (MAC) and to measure the effect of ethambutol on resistance.

190 provided using antitubercular drugs such as ethambutol or isoniazid known to inhibit the biosynthesi

191 tress caused by these mutations or caused by ethambutol or isoniazid treatment may be relieved by ini

192 200 mg), isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and either ethambutol or moxifloxacin.

193 hese, >40% exhibited resistance to rifampin, ethambutol, or amikacin.

194 amide [75/50/150 mg], with or without 100 mg ethambutol, or rifampicin/isoniazid [75/50 mg]).

195 vo assays, adult rats were administered oral ethambutol over a 3-month period.

196 floxacin versus 71% (98 of 138) treated with ethambutol (p = 0.97).

197 Ethambutol perturbs mitochondrial function.

198 Combined ethambutol plus clarithromycin did not increase anti-MAC

199 The substitution of moxifloxacin for ethambutol produced promising results for improved tuber

200 herapy with first-line (rifampin, isoniazid, ethambutol, pyrazinamide) or second-line (bedaquiline, p

201 apy with multiple drugs including isoniazid, ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and rifampin increased from 4.

202 DST for ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and second-line tuberculosis d

203 the tools were high, whereas the results for ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and streptomycin resistance we

204 ta across five drugs (isoniazid, rifampicin, ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and streptomycin), we demonstr

205 The adjusted odds of treatment success for ethambutol, pyrazinamide, and the group 4 drugs ranged f

206 rm 2); or (iii) standard-dose rifampicin and ethambutol (R15HZE, arm 3) for 8 weeks, followed by 10 m

207 lus: (i) high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg) and ethambutol (R30HZE, arm 1); (ii) high-dose rifampicin an

208 Ethambutol RAVs at embB codons 306, 405 and 497 were res

209 Ethambutol reduced relapses and emergence of clarithromy

210 h two human trials, which showed that adding ethambutol reduced the frequency of clarithromycin-resis

211 Ethambutol resistance is acquired through the acquisitio

212 Mutations that confer ethambutol resistance map mostly around the putative act

213 complexity DST with high fluoroquinolone and ethambutol resistance sensitivity, moderate amikacin res

214 orage and transport, signal transduction and ethambutol resistance.

215 m tuberculosis strains selected in vitro for ethambutol resistance.

216 Testing additional ethambutol-resistant and streptomycin-resistant strains

217 On the other hand, CSU20, an ethambutol-resistant clinical isolate, makes a vastly he

218 for rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, respectively (positivity threshold >=50 spot

219 ulted in reduced or increased sensitivity to ethambutol, respectively.

220 For the 74 isolates evaluated, initial ethambutol results agreed by all three methods for 64 (8

221 conventional rifampin/isoniazid/pyrazinamide/ethambutol (RHZE).

222 on (SSCC) on treatment with the azithromycin-ethambutol-rifabutin standard of care (SOC).

223 o 94.8%, 95.9 to 97.2% and 97.1 to 98.2% for ethambutol, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, isoniazid and oflo

224 Patients received CLARI 500 mg twice daily, ethambutol, rifampin (RMP), or rifabutin (RBT) and initi

225 She had been receiving azithromycin, ethambutol, rifampin, and amikacin as systemic anti-myco

226 treated in a randomized fashion with either ethambutol, rifampin, or clofazimine, were tested by thr

227 45%-80%) for amikacin, and 88% (79%-93%) for ethambutol (specificities of 97%-100%).

228 and rifabutin (arm 2), or 3) rifampicin and ethambutol (standard of care; arm 3).

229 ceptibility results for isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, streptomycin, amikacin, kanamycin, capreomyc

230 s that also matched the purported source for ethambutol, streptomycin, and pyrazinamide.

231 reased the expression of downstream embC, an ethambutol target, resulting in MICs of 8 mug/ml.

232 For instance, ethambutol targets arabinogalactan biosynthesis through

233 Levels of agreement for ethambutol tested at 2.5 and 7.5 micro g/ml were 70 and

234 obial agents, including rifampin, isoniazid, ethambutol, tetracycline, and chloramphenicol.

235 regimen including macrolide, rifamycin, and ethambutol that is continued for 12 months beyond sputum

236 Agents such as isoniazid and ethambutol that work by inhibiting cell wall biosynthesi

237 For rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, the specificity of resistance prediction was

238 with isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol thrice weekly for 8 wk, followed by isoniazid

239 sterilizing (rifampin and pyrazinamide), and ethambutol to help prevent the emergence of drug resista

240 f V-R to inhibit peptidoglycan synthesis and ethambutol to inhibit arabinogalactan synthesis undersco

241 Ethambutol toxicity was therefore studied in rodent reti

242 mate is necessary for the full expression of ethambutol toxicity, and glutamate antagonists prevent e

243 our-drug (isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, ethambutol) treatment (induction phase) were randomly as

244 Increasing ethambutol use by 5 mo increased culture response by 1.5

245 re (isoniazid, rifampicin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol) using sealed opaque envelopes.

246 ; 57% of patients achieved target ratios for ethambutol, versus 42% for clarithromycin, 19% for amika

247 for rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol was 32.5 (interquartile range, 20.1-45.1), 16

248 uding rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol was developed and parameters aligned with pre

249 roup (46 vs. 21%; P < 0.001); in particular, ethambutol was more frequently discontinued in the daily

250 the streptomycin, isoniazid, rifampicin and ethambutol were 31.0, 17.2, 19.5 and 20.7, respectively.

251 In all patients isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol were added in standard doses for the second 7

252 with rifampin, streptomycin, isoniazid, and ethambutol were compared to those of the BACTEC 460 meth

253 d doses, exposures to RIF, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol were lower in children than in adults.

254 ifloxacin with pyrazinamide, ethionamide, or ethambutol were more active than pyrazinamide plus etham

255 s concentrations of isoniazid, rifampin, and ethambutol were tested by the agar proportion method and

256 s for isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol were the same in the HFS-TB as in patients.

257 involved the presence of very low levels of ethambutol, which enables the entry of oligonucleotides

258 The replacement of ethambutol with moxifloxacin did not significantly impro

259 In the second group, we replaced ethambutol with moxifloxacin for 17 weeks, followed by 9

260 , rifampin was replaced with rifapentine and ethambutol with moxifloxacin.

261 aration, ranging from 5.50 +/- 0.22 days for ethambutol with the inoculum prepared from a McFarland s

262 ed from a McFarland standard to 8.0 days for ethambutol with the inoculum prepared from a seed bottle